HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.4130 OF 2012 Dated 21-7-2014 Between:
Talari Nagaraju.
..Petitioner.
And:
State of A.P., represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another.
…Respondents.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.4130 OF 2012 ORDER:
This petition is filed to quash proceedings in C.C.No.2057 of 2011 on the file of IX MM, Kukatpalli, at Miyapur for alleged offences under Sections 494 and 498- A I.P.C.
Heard both sides.
Petitioner is sole accused in the above referred C.C.
The main contention of advocate for petitioner is that de facto complainant-second respondent cannot be called as wife and she cannot maintain these offences, particularly for the offence under Section 494 I.P.C. He further submitted that police have no jurisdiction to investigate offence under Section 494 I.P.C. as it is a non- cognizable offence.
Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that besides Section 494 I.P.C., there is offence of Section 498-A I.P.C. and police after investigation and examining witnesses filed charge sheet and these objections have to be raised before trial court and the present petition is not maintainable and they have to file discharge petition.
I have perused the material papers filed along with the quash petition.
As seen from the Charge Sheet, Police after examining five witnesses found that the petitioner herein is liable for punishment for the offences under Sections 494 and 498-A I.P.C.
Now the plea of the accused is that de facto complainant cannot be treated as wife which is a matter of evidence and which has to be considered by the trial court after examining the witnesses. The Investigating Officer has recorded statements of five witnesses including two neighbours and one eye witness and statements of those witnesses are not filed along with quash petition.
This court at the stage of Section 482 Cr.P.C., cannot weigh the evidence and the correctness of the statements of the witnesses and it is a matter of appreciation which can be done only during trial.
For these reasons, I am of the view that there are no grounds to quash the proceedings. As C.C. is of the year 2011, I feel that the court below is directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible by considering the objections raised by the petitioner without being influenced by the dismissal of this petition.
With the above observation, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.
As a sequel to the disposal of this Criminal petition, the Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending, shall stand dismissed.
JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR Dated 21-7-2014.
Dvs.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR Dvs CRIMINAL PETITION No.4130 OF 2012 Dated 21-7-2014